Navigating between private and public: Understanding publicness of public open spaces in private developments in Hong Kong

IF 3.9 2区 社会学 Q1 URBAN STUDIES Journal of Urban Management Pub Date : 2024-08-26 DOI:10.1016/j.jum.2024.08.003
Izzy Yi Jian , Kar Him Mo , Pengfei Chen , Wanchun Ye , Kin Wai Michael Siu , Edwin H.W. Chan
{"title":"Navigating between private and public: Understanding publicness of public open spaces in private developments in Hong Kong","authors":"Izzy Yi Jian ,&nbsp;Kar Him Mo ,&nbsp;Pengfei Chen ,&nbsp;Wanchun Ye ,&nbsp;Kin Wai Michael Siu ,&nbsp;Edwin H.W. Chan","doi":"10.1016/j.jum.2024.08.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Given that lands became increasingly expensive for governments to meet open space standards, there emerged a growing trend towards private sector involvement public open space provision. This collaboration has given rise to public open spaces in private developments (POSPD), characterised by varying levels of ‘publicness’ – the degree to which a space embodies public qualities and serves public interests. This research seeks to systematically understand the diverse manifestations of publicness in POSPDs using a proposed conceptual framework. Empirical examination of cases in Hong Kong yielded the statistical categorisation of POSPDs into five types, namely <em>Edge Zone</em>, <em>Hide-and-Seek</em>, <em>Pseudo-Public Park</em>, <em>Consumers</em>’ <em>Paradise</em> and <em>Public Plaza</em>. The results revealed a classist nature of POSPD publicness, with accessibility disproportionately favouring privileged groups. These findings contribute to a better understanding of POSPD publicness and highlights gaps in POS service and governance practice, provides valuable guidance for urban planners, policymakers, and developers in navigating the complexities of public space provision in increasingly privatized urban environments. The insights are relevant for creating more inclusive public spaces that cater to the needs of all community members, particularly in Asia’s high-density urban contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":45131,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urban Management","volume":"13 4","pages":"Pages 787-799"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Urban Management","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2226585624000888","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Given that lands became increasingly expensive for governments to meet open space standards, there emerged a growing trend towards private sector involvement public open space provision. This collaboration has given rise to public open spaces in private developments (POSPD), characterised by varying levels of ‘publicness’ – the degree to which a space embodies public qualities and serves public interests. This research seeks to systematically understand the diverse manifestations of publicness in POSPDs using a proposed conceptual framework. Empirical examination of cases in Hong Kong yielded the statistical categorisation of POSPDs into five types, namely Edge Zone, Hide-and-Seek, Pseudo-Public Park, ConsumersParadise and Public Plaza. The results revealed a classist nature of POSPD publicness, with accessibility disproportionately favouring privileged groups. These findings contribute to a better understanding of POSPD publicness and highlights gaps in POS service and governance practice, provides valuable guidance for urban planners, policymakers, and developers in navigating the complexities of public space provision in increasingly privatized urban environments. The insights are relevant for creating more inclusive public spaces that cater to the needs of all community members, particularly in Asia’s high-density urban contexts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
游走于私人与公共之间:了解香港私人发展项目中公共开放空间的公共性
由于政府为满足开放空间标准而占用土地的成本越来越高,私营部门参与提供公共开放空间的趋势日益明显。这种合作催生了私人开发项目中的公共开放空间(POSPD),其特点是不同程度的 "公共性"--空间体现公共品质和服务公共利益的程度。本研究试图利用一个拟议的概念框架,系统地理解私人开发项目中公共性的各种表现形式。通过对香港个案的实证研究,统计出私人订制公共空间可分为五种类型,即边缘地带、捉迷藏、伪公共公园、消费者乐园和公共广场。研究结果表明,公众休憩空间的公共性具有阶级歧视的性质,其可进入性对特权群体尤为有利。这些研究结果有助于更好地理解公共空间的公共性,并突出了公共空间服务和治理实践中的差距,为城市规划者、决策者和开发商在日益私有化的城市环境中驾驭复杂的公共空间提供问题提供了宝贵的指导。这些见解对于创建更具包容性的公共空间,满足所有社区成员的需求,尤其是在亚洲高密度的城市环境中,具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
4.90%
发文量
45
审稿时长
65 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Urban Management (JUM) is the Official Journal of Zhejiang University and the Chinese Association of Urban Management, an international, peer-reviewed open access journal covering planning, administering, regulating, and governing urban complexity. JUM has its two-fold aims set to integrate the studies across fields in urban planning and management, as well as to provide a more holistic perspective on problem solving. 1) Explore innovative management skills for taming thorny problems that arise with global urbanization 2) Provide a platform to deal with urban affairs whose solutions must be looked at from an interdisciplinary perspective.
期刊最新文献
Revealing the transformation of spatial structure of greater Cairo: Insights from satellite imagery and geospatial metrics The status quo of architecture and its impact on urban management: Christopher Alexander's insights Housing policy and markets in China: Affordability and sustainability Educational inequality in urban settings: A spatial analysis of school distribution and double-shift system challenges – A case study Navigating between private and public: Understanding publicness of public open spaces in private developments in Hong Kong
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1